Parliament’s Blind Commitment To Tunnel Is Irresponsible

Following the approval of the Parliamentary
motion which gave political backing to the Malta-Gozo tunnel last Wednesday, 13
organisations state that supporting an underwater tunnel before independent,
serious and holistic studies are carried out and published is not only
counterproductive but also irresponsible, since the benefits and impacts of the
tunnel are not yet known.

The organisations note that, since this motion
does not have legally binding implications, it simply represents an affirmation
of the political commitment to building a tunnel. However, this is a blind
commitment since, at this stage, crucial data and studies have not been
presented, including the most basic fact of whether the tunnel will indeed
reduce journey time between the two islands. It is questionable whether a
relatively narrow tunnel with one lane in each direction, through which up to
9,000 cars will pass daily, will reduce the average journey time, when taking
into consideration the capacity of the tunnel itself as well as higher
congestion along the routes leading to and from it.

While the approved motion does refer to the
undertaking and publication of studies, common sense dictates that a commitment
to the tunnel option should only come after such studies are carried out and
published, not before. Moreover, these studies should not have the tunnel
option as their point of departure, but should objectively compare different
options in terms of costs, impacts and efficacy, including for example, a
fast-ferry service. Earlier this month, several organisations filed a judicial
protest against the Minister for Transport, Infrastructure and Capital Projects
to publish all studies pertaining to the proposed tunnel between Malta and
Gozo. They also asked for a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) to be
carried out as required by national and EU laws.

Whilst fully acknowledging the need to address
mobility challenges experienced by Gozitan workers and students, an informed
discussion about the best possible option to address such challenges can only
start after studies comparing different options are carried out and published.